Ignorance is the basic foundation of graft and corruption. The BIR-corrupt brigade is maximizing its full potential and profitability. Fishes find strength, courage and competence in numbers. They had conquered their predators/enemies by grouping together in order to make them bigger than their enemies. You too can become bigger than the fear that lingered in your minds and hearts. Join 'JuanTALKS' now and share your knowledge and experiences to other Filipinos.

In the year 2003, the former President of the Republic of the Philippines, Ms. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, publicly declared that the 45,000 Letters of Authority are deemed ‘cancelled and ineffective’. That was the first time that the taxpaying public became aware of the actual number of being audit-investigated by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR).

If that numbers shall only be increased therefrom by ten (10) percent yearly. Then, at present, the numbers of taxpayer being subjected to multiple stresses and mental anguish may reach, more or less, to 100,000. And for a moment, let you and me pause and think for a while that each taxpayer having a Letter of Authority would only BRIBE a revenue officer of not less than P400,000 (average), then, the wasted money that went directly into the wallets of CORRUPT BIR OFFICIALS may reach to P400,000,000,000.

This didn’t happen overnight but in the span of a century (100 years).

You can’t FLY away from this stigma but your choice to be its FINANCIER or FISCALIZER would definitely FAVOUR your FAMILY.

Legal basis.

According to the Philippine Supreme Court, it is your duty to refute or make noise whenever an act or attack had been perpetuated against you. Failure to do so shall make even the revenue officer’s void actions to be true and correct. Notwithstanding, that you are being required to condemn approaches of errant and enterprising revenue officers, the Court obliges you to give them another chance by way of informing them their mistakes and misgivings so that with such opportunity, they may correct and rectify the same.

In tax case-handling business, having more friends and relatives within the BIR is no longer the best selling preposition for lawyers and CPAs or a business advantage for taxpayers. In fact, the ‘WHO YOU KNOW’ slogan is fast fading. Nowadays, more and more taxpayers are choosing those ‘WHO KNEW WHAT THEY KNOW ABOUT TAXATION.’ In that view, Katax is sharing to you his three (3) so effective SECRETS, (1) Pay attention to the BIR regulations, (2) Advertise your knowledge in taxation, and (3) Apply it wisely, correctly and on time (acronym, ‘PAA’). Furthermore, this is his professional advise to his many students and clients, ‘DON’T AND NEVER ELEVATE A REVENUE OFFICER FROM BEING A SERVANT TO A SAINT’

If you are feeling guilty, shameful of self and embarrassed because you always invite revenue officers to a very fancy lunch/dinner, provide substantial discount and freebies, give gifts even if there is no major occasion, or bribe for you are so lazy to know the truth and the rules, don’t be because there is always a way out. Change your behaviour toward them and you change your life.

In line thereto, Katax is requesting you to hear what the famous Dog Whisperer, Mr. Cesar Milan once said, ‘BECAUSE DOGS ARE HAPPY TO BE TREATED AS DOGS, DON’T TREAT THEM AS HUMAN BEINGS.’ Applying the same doctrine to your current situation, ‘BECAUSE REVENUE OFFICERS ARE SO CONTENTED AND COMFORTABLE TO BE PUBLIC SERVANTS, DON’T TREAT THEM LIKE YOUR MANAGERS, INVESTORS, CREDITORS AND VERY IMPORTANT PEOPLE.’

See the picture.

Finally, another SECRET of Katax is to deny and deprive these revenue officers from seeing, hearing, holding and having any type of managerial reports and financial disclosures because these are their tools to confuse and abuse you.

Learning objectives

A, To comprehend what BIR’s notices are and for whom they are intended

B, To know the BIR’s specific reasons in preparing and issuing its legal notices

C, To learn how not to be included in the BIR-audit candidates’ listing

D, To grasp what these legal communications are telling you

E, To understand how to overcome these notices' negative effects

F, To use these legal notices to extinguish your outstanding obligations

G, To utilise the BIR-revenue officers' obligations to your advantage

H, To use the available reliefs and remedies to minimise your tax exposure

Expected outcomes.To be able to

1, understand the legal and regulatory requirements that cover the preparation/issuance of a particular legal notice

2, examine and evaluate its disadvantages and advantages

3, collate and harness its powers that favoured you

4, use its powers to protect and promote you rights and privileges

5, extinguish without the unnecessary hindrance and delay, and unwanted expenses the obligations that it created

6, interpret and explain its content and context, and meaning to anyone

7, identify and determine the crimes that are being deliberately employed in its preparation and issuance

8, develop an audit planning techniques and defensive stance

Important.

In some instances and unavoidable circumstance, some of the session dates and topics/issues may change without notice and obligation. Keep self posted.

Historical basis.
With the inflexible regulation and audit procedures of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), the preparation and use of MANAGERIAL accounting which is preferred by many businesses and FINANCIAL accounting that is being pursued by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) through its agents, - Certified Public Accountants (CPA) have encountered a DEVASTATING setback.

In the words of the BIR Chief, the major disparities from these accounting approaches must strictly be reconciled with the TAX ACCOUNTING RULES. And, the entries thereof must separately written and kept in a specific book that is the reconciling book of accounts (RR 8-2007). Of course, the sum of which must also be disclosed in the NOTES TO ANNUAL INCOME TAX RETURN (1701/1702).

Legal basis.
The safeguarding of assets and maximising of profitability (managerial accounting) have consistently been your focused. Moreso, to make your investors and creditors always happy, a future-pace financial disclosures that showed a substantial growth in revenues and assets became your standard operating procedures (financial accounting). All in all, these approaches had placed you, through the years, to have an enormous taxable sales and a bigger than life net taxable income. However, in reality, you have too little (or none at all) cash to pay for your value added tax and income tax therefor.

In that view, Katax EmelinoTMaestrostill believes that your managerial and financial secrets should remain and be kept 'SECRET' because these secrets have became the blueprint of so many revenue officers in harassing, oppressing, vexing or intimidating you who may, one way or the other, have (1) too little (or none at all) knowledge and knowhow, and (2) no proper communication skill to express and explain the context and meaning of your managerial reports and financial disclosures against the law-mandated TAX ACCOUNTING RULES.

Doubtlessly, because you're a law-abiding taxpayer, you are really committed to comply correctly and on time with the BIR's TAX ACCOUNTING RULES And not to repeat again, the REAL STARTING POINT is your LITERACY IN TAX ACCOUNTING RULES which THE TALP WILL AND CAN DEFINITELY DELIVER AND PROVIDE.

Venue and Time.
The venue, date and time of each session shall be emailed or texted to you once you are already enrolled.

Learning objectives

1, to remove self/client from being so dependent on those who are pretending to be competent

2, to know the peculiarities and similarities of tax accounting, financial accounting and managerial accounting

3, to understand why tax accounting is superior over the financial accounting and managerial accounting

4, to grasp/explain the applicable tax rules, regulations and doctrines

5, to evaluate the existing accounting policies and practices

6, to develop accounting procedures in tune with the regulatory requirements

7, to figure out the favourable uses of the three (3) layers of tax accounting

The person examining me is Attorney with law office address at unit 419 Corporate 101 Mother Ignacia Quezon City. The examination is being undertaken at the same office address.

I am fully aware that my answers to my counsel’s questions are made under the penalty of perjury.

The pronoun ‘I, my, mine and me’ shall refer to the Accused.

OFFER OF TESTIMONY:
That my testimony is being offered:
(a) To establish the identity of the person who is the subjected of herein criminal complaint;
(b) To identify a documentary evidence that is material and relevant in herein case;
(c) To prove that at the time of preparing, signing, and filing of the Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903, the accused has no evil intention and sick-motives to knowingly dishonour/discredit the image, character and reputation of the complainant;
(e) To demonstrate that the objective of Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903 (as stated in its Preamble) is to bring justice, fair-play and transparency as well as expose, express and explain the malfeasant, misfeasant and nonfeasant actions knowingly executed by the concerned BIR Officials; and
(f) To confirm that the use of Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903 as the primal evidence of the private complainant is contrary to law, public order, good moral and public policy.

QUESTION (Q; ATTORNEY): In what dialect would you like to be asked?
ANSWER (A; EMELINO T MAESTRO): In English language, Sir.

Q: Will you please state before this Honorable Court your name and other pertinent circumstances?
A: I am Mister Emelino T Maestro, of legal age, Filipino citizen, married and with postal address at Unit 419, Corporate 101, Mother Ignacia, Quezon City. I am a Certified Public Accountant, an author of various tax books, a resource speaker, lecturer, management and financial adviser, tax consultant and professor. Moreover, I am also the Founder of Tax Accounting Society and Auditor Ng Bayan (an Ombudsman-accredited Corruption Prevention Unit) which are now both inactive.

Q: Do you recall why you visited the Regional Director’s Office, Region No. 09228010922, Bureau of Internal Revenue, Quezon City; the Office of the Commissioner, National Office, Bureau of Internal Revenue, Quezon City; and the Office of the Ombudsman, Quezon City, on July 20, 2009 and the office of the private complainant (SUPER NGUSO) which is the Legal Division, Region No. 09228010922, Bureau of Internal Revenue, Quezon City on July 23, 2009?
A: I knowingly visited the Regional Director’s Office and the Office of the Commissioner of the Bureau of Internal Revenue and the Office of the Ombudsman on July 20, 2009 in order to extinguish my legal obligations to my then-client, ETM TAX AGENT OFFICE Asia Phils, Inc. (ETM TAX AGENT OFFICE) and moreover, to comply with the mandate of the laws of the State that is to inform the higher ups of the private complainant and the Ombudsman of what is perceived to be the malicious acts of concerned BIR officials. Finally, I, after consciously considering the right of the private complainant to have access to the contents of my Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903 (Annex 1), also visited his office and filed it thereat on July 23, 2013.

Q: Aside from serving personally your Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903 to the Office of the Ombudsman, Office of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Office of the Regional Director, BIR Region No. 09228010922, Quezon City and Office of the Chief Legal Division, BIR Region No. 09228010922, Quezon City, had somebody else received directly from you a copy of your Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903?
A: I did not furnish, neither supply, anyone other than the Offices of the persons that you mentioned.

Q: Why did you not personally provide the (1) Ombudsman, (2) Commissioner of Internal Revenue, (3) Regional Director of BIR Region No. 09228010922, Quezon City and (4) Chief Legal Division of BIR Region No. 09228010922, Quezon City a copy of your Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903?
A: Because of the bureaucratic complexities, their respective Offices had assigned a regular employee whose regular and legal obligation is to accept and receive all the letters, protests, petitions, etc that are being filed/submitted by the taxpaying public/persons. The said employee would not allow you to have such letters, protest, petitions, etc to be filed to and accepted/received by their respective superiors/bosses for they would be charged of DERELICTION OF DUTY. Thus, to follow their Office’s prescribed procedures, I have to bring my communications directly to the person whose official duty is to accept and receive the same.

Q: You stated that you prepared, signed and filed the Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903 in extinguishing your legal obligations to ETM TAX AGENT OFFICE and in complying with the laws of the State, would you please state what are these obligations and what laws of the State are you referring to?
A: According to my contract with ETM TAX AGENT OFFICE (Annex 2), the following are my obligations to it, thus.. (1) To cancel the subject matter [BIR Letter of Authority Numbered 43823 dated January 16, 2007 TY 2014] or (1) To verify the veracity of BIR assessments if such conforms with the procedural due process and are supported by laws and facts, (2) To gather information and evidences through legal researches in order to support the company’s factual and legal position on matters related to the subject, (3) To represent the company before the BIR on matters pertaining to the subject, and (4) To make ourselves available for routine consultation on matter related to the subject. Furthermore, Republic Acts No. 6770, 6713, 9485, and 8424, 1987 Administrative Code and New Civil Code are encouraging and enjoining the inhabitants of the Republic of the Philippines to inform and involve the superiors of errant and enterprising tax officials so that these superior officers may act on time and correct the acts of those errant and enterprising tax officials. Finally, I just followed the order of the Philippine Supreme Court in preparing, signing and filing my Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903 to the already mentioned offices as I quote its wisdom “Tax laws are civil in nature. Under our Civil Code, acts executed against the mandatory provision of law are void, except when the law itself authorizes the validity of those acts. Failure to comply with Section 228 [NIRC] does not render the assessment void, but also finds no validation in any provision in the Tax Code. We cannot condone errant or enterprising tax officials, as they are expected to be vigilant and law-abiding.”

Q: So based on your written contract with ETM TAX AGENT OFFICE, you represented ETM TAX AGENT OFFICE before the BIR?
A: Because contracts, if their provisions are not contrary to the laws of the State and would not create damages to any party, form part of the legal system of the Republic of the Philippines, I am obliged to represent ETM TAX AGENT OFFICE before the BIR. I have no choice to speak of. Yes, Sir.

Q: Because of the Philippine Supreme Court’s order that says, “We cannot condone errant or enterprising tax officials, as they are expected to be vigilant and law-abiding.”, you prepared, signed and filed your Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903 to the first-mentioned offices?
A: Yes, Sir.

Q: What is/are your purpose/s in preparing and signing your Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903?
A: I made it clear to its recipients that my objective is “The essence is to bring justice, fair-play and transparency as well as expose, express and explain the malfeasant, misfeasant and nonfeasant actions knowingly executed by the concerned BIR Officials.” as the same is shown in its Preamble, 1st page. For this purpose and for the record, I quote the statement that can be found on page 948, Criminal Law, Book Two, 16th edition, 2006, Luis B. Reyes, “In Libel, it is essential that the intention of the offender in publishing the libellous matter was to discredit or dishonour the person allegedly libelled. If the matter charges as libellous is only an incident in an act which has another objective, the crime is not Libel.”

Q: Are you a BIR-accredited Tax Agent?
A: It is my conviction and belief that from 2001 up to the time that the BIR implemented the new procedural requirements of accrediting Tax Agents, yes, Sir.

Q: What is/are your basis/bases of being a BIR-accredited Tax Agent?
A: I can no longer locate my Tax Agent application form and its attachments but I offer the original letter of Atty Mario A Saldevar, Chief, Legal Division, Region No. 6, Bureau of Internal Revenue, Manila City dated February 27, 2009 stating among others that he signed my application and referred it to the National Accreditation Board (Annex 3). Accordingly, I explained in my Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903 that there are two laws which would support my contention, namely... (1) Section 18, Book VII, Non Expiration of License, 1987 Administrative Code. -Where the licensee has made timely and sufficient application for the renewal of a license with reference to any activity of a continuing nature, the existing license shall not expire until the application shall have been finally determined by the agency, and (2) Section 9, Automatic Extension of Permits and Licenses, Republic Act No. 9485. -If a government office or agency fails to act on an application and/or request for renewal of a license, permit or authority subject for renewal within a prescribed period, said permit, license or authority shall automatically be extended until a decision is rendered on the application for renewal. Provided, That the automatic extension shall not apply when the permit, license, or authority covers activities which pose danger to public, health, public safety, public morals or to public policy including, but not limited to, natural resource extraction activities. These are my legal justifications for claiming that before the new BIR policies on accrediting Tax Agents have been implemented (by the generosity of the laws of the State), I was once a BIR-accredited Tax Agent. Finally as far as Tax-Agent-perjury is concerned, the Department of Justice per its Resolution to XV-03-INV-091-08725 had already acquitted me, viz; “Nonetheless, respondent’s Legal Petition Notice does not contain any allegation that he is in fact accredited. He only propose that based on the documents he submitted to the BIR, he should be considered accredited. A condition of law, hence, not per se perjurious.”

Q: As far as you know, what are the official duties and legal obligations of the private complainant?
A: I know him as the Chief, Legal Division of Region No. 09228010922, Bureau of Internal Revenue and among his duties are inscribed in Section 11, National Internal Revenue Code, as amended (NIRC). -It shall be the duty of every Revenue District Officer or other internal revenue officers and employees to ensure that all laws, and rules and regulations affecting national internal revenue are faithfully executed and complied with, and to aid in the prevention, detection and punishment of frauds of delinquencies in connection therewith and in Section 228, NIRC. -The taxpayers shall be informed in writing of the law and the facts on which the assessment is made; otherwise, the assessment shall be void. Accordingly, the Secretary of Finance, upon the recommendation of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, specifically and strictly obliged him, pursuant to Revenue Administrative Order No. 10-2000 (Annex 4), to do/extinguish the following, viz; “(1) Administer regional plans, activities, standards, and other measure necessary to implement the legal prescribed by the National Office; (2) Ensure the uniform application of tax laws, regulation and court decisions; (3) Prepared and issue legal opinions based on established precedents and elevate to Legal Services cases for rulings or opinions which involve national policies or where there are no established precedents; (4) Process claims for tax credits/refund within its jurisdiction involving erroneous or illegal collection of taxes and protests involving questions of law and recommend appropriate action for approval of the Commissioner or duly authorized representative; (5) Evaluate offers of compromise settlement of assessments involving legal issues within its jurisdiction and make recommendations for approval of the Regional Evaluation Board; and (6) Assist in the conduct of hearing of administrative charges involving illegal enrichment cases against regional personnel and violation of Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act

Q: Having said so, is it safe to say that he has no power and authority to assess and collect any internal revenue tax?
A: That is an understatement, Sir. He is playing a very material and relevant role in the assessment and collection of internal revenue taxes. As you already know, Sir, the Philippine Constitution has already stated that THE RULE OF TAXATION MUST BE UNIFORM AND EQUITABLE which in my own understanding is that there must be a written-uniform rule before an assessment and collection of taxes shall knowingly be pursued. Since my Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903 raised factual and legal issues, I am engaging and enjoining him and his Office to resolve the said legal issues. These legal issues are (1) the irregularity of the BIR-letter of authority wherein the power to assess a tax originated and (2) the request for him to provide and supply not me but through me, the ETM TAX AGENT OFFICE, the legal basis in assessing and collecting 2014 withholding taxes. These acts/things are within the armpits/jurisdiction of the Legal Division. Regional Offices, Bureau of Internal Revenue. He is there, pursuant to Revenue Administrative Order No. 10-2000, to be the last resort of a taxpayer in cases that the latter feels and thinks that an abuse of power/authority in the assessment and collection of taxes has consciously been performed.

Q: Does it refer to the private complainant, Mr. SUPER NGUSO?
A: Generally speaking, Sir, it refers to all Chiefs Legal Division and not exclusively to the private complainant. However, in my Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903, there are two (2) CLDs, namely SUPER NGUSO and NARROW HEADED.

Q: In your statement ‘Evidences on records showed that the RDO, GS, RO, CLD, CAD and RD had no official orders from the SOF which expressed and explained that the 2014 withholding taxes presumably determined using the jeopardy assessment is not included in the immunities provided by RA 9480’, is the term CLD referred to the private complainant?
A: No, Sir. It refers to CLD NARROW HEADED as I stated in item 5, IV. PROPOSED CONCLUSION, my Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903.

Q: In your statement, ‘Clearly, the 2014 withholding deficiency tax assessment is unacceptable and illegal because it failed not only to follow the above jurisprudence but also, most importantly, the acts of RO, GS, RD, RDO, CAD and CLD violated the BIR internal rules and guidelines as shown below: a.] RMC 48-90 - Issuance of a deficiency tax assessment without verification of the taxpayer’s records is illegal and b.] RMO 16-80 - Jeopardy or table assessment should never be resorted to and report of investigation should be supported by documentary evidences and authorities.’, is the acronym ‘CLD’ meant for the private complainant?
A: No, Sir. It refers to CLD NARROW HEADED as I stated in item 5, IV. PROPOSED CONCLUSION, my Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903.

Q: What do you consider your Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903?
A: It is an official document intended for the use of the Bureau of Internal Revenue.

Q: What does the term ‘official document’ mean?
A: According to Revenue Memorandum Order No. 53-98 (Annex 5), in relation to Section 270, NIRC, all official document may not be removed or used for personal purposes without securing first the written approval form the proper authority. For conveniency, I copy-pasted Section 15, RMO 53-98, viz; “A. All records and documents in the custody of revenue officers and employees are in their custody for official purposes only. It is unlawful to remove or conceal, alter, mutilate, obliterate, or destroy records or documents or to remove with intent of performing any of the above action. Employees must not remove records and documents from official files without approval from proper authority. Working papers, copies of reports and other official records and documents shall be promptly sent to file when no longer needed for official purposes. Disposal or destruction of records and documents is to be made in accordance with established requirements, and b. Employees shall be held responsible for the loss, disappearance, or theft of official documents when attributable to negligence or carelessness. Employees are cautioned against leaving official documents unprotected in automobiles, leaving them in public conveyances, in rest rooms, in taxpayer’s offices, etc. Recovery of documents may no necessarily be a mitigating circumstance after the loss.

Q: The term ‘proper authority’ refers to whom?
A: According to Section 7, NIRC, the term ‘proper authority’ refers to the Honorable Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Q: Okay. If the official documents such as your Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903 was used other than for official purposes only, what would happen to the documents?
A: The unlawful use of a public/official document that is for personal purposes shall make the said document spurious or illegally acquired. Because private complainant used a BIR’s official document for personal purposes, then, it may be concluded that his primal evidence is unlawful.

Q: What was really your intention when you wrote and submitted the subject communication to the Office of the Ombudsman?
A: I wrote and submitted my Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903 to the Office of the Ombudsman in compliance with Republic Act No. 6770 and the National Policy ‘Magsumbong sa Ombudsman” as well as to double check if the specified and prescribed procedures of the Bureau of Internal Revenue are being diligently applied by the concerned revenue officers. Moreover, it is written on the face of the said communication my objective that is “The essence is to bring justice, fair-play and transparency as well as expose, express and explain the malfeasant, misfeasant and nonfeasant actions knowingly executed by the concerned BIR Officials.”

Q: What was really your intention when you wrote and submitted the subject communication to the Bureau of Internal Revenue?
A: I wrote and submitted my Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903 to the following offices, namely (a) Office of the Regional Director, BIR Region No. 09228010922 (b) Legal Division, of BIR Region No. 09228010922 and (c) Office of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, BIR National Office to propagate the following, viz; “The essence is to bring justice, fair-play and transparency as well as expose, express and explain the malfeasant, misfeasant and nonfeasant actions knowingly executed by the concerned BIR Officials.” which is clearly and completely stated on the face of the said communication.

Q: In your Legal Petition Notice dated July 11, 1903, you mentioned, ‘The Respondent, being rumored to be one of the brightest legal minds in the BIR, had shown ‘dense and dull’ in this instant case.’, what does the term “dense and dull’ mean to you?
A: I invented the word “dense and dull’ by combining the words ‘dense’, ‘and’ and ‘dull’ and enclosing them with open and close quotations. This word ‘dense and dull’ means “PUNUNG PUNO NG INIISIP KAYA NAHIRAPANG UMUNAWA.”

Q: How did the complainant arrive in thinking and describing the term ‘dense and dull’ as similar to the term ‘stupid’?
A: From the surrounding circumstances, I believe, this is how SUPER NGUSO arrive at his definition for the term ‘dense and dull’, viz;
1. First, he divided the term ‘dense and dull’ into ‘dense’ and ‘dull’ (two terms)
2. Second, for the term ‘dense’, using a computer and its internet connection, he googled it
3. Third, from the millions of websites that offer numerous synonyms for the term ‘dense’, he chose ‘http://thinkexist.com/dictionary/meaning/dense/“
4. From the said website, he picked up its synonyms, viz;
having the constituent parts massed or crowded together;
(a) close;
(b) compact;
(c) thick;
(d) containing much matter in a small space;
(e) heavy;
(f) opaque;
(g) as, a dense crowd;
(h) a dense forest;
(i) a dense fog.
(j) stupid;
(k) gross;
(l) crass;
(m) as, dense ignorance.
5. Fourth, from the above list of possible meanings of the term ‘dense’ he picked up what he thinks and believes would benefit him that is the term “stupid” which is in the eleventh (11th) place from its nearest common meaning.

Q: Do you have proof that would support your contention?
A: For this purpose, I used a computer and its internet connection. Then I typed on its browser the term ‘dense definition’. Then, twenty two million one hundred thousand (22,100,000) websites appeared. All of these websites offered a definition for the term ‘dense’.

Q: What does your exercise mean?
A: It means that the complainant, SUPER NGUSO, did not know the common meaning of the term ‘dense’. In fact, in his Judicial Affidavit notarised in February 29, 2055, he affirmed and confirmed that he only learned its meaning from the Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Synonyms.

Q: Have you tried to look for the meaning of the term ‘dense’ in the same dictionary?
A: Yes, in fact, I tried the same research techniques that he usually does. I got a computer in order to connect to the website of Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Synonyms. Then, I found out that the synonyms for the term ‘dense’ do not include the word ‘stupid’, viz;
(a) compact
(b) crowded
(c) close
(d) jam-packed
(e) packed
(f) serried
(g) thick
(h) tight

Q: What can you say about that?
A: The word ‘stupid’ does not really the perceived and common meaning of the term ‘dense’. And, the twenty two million one hundred thousand (22,100,000) websites that offer a meaning or definition for the term ‘dense’ are very relevant and material evidences which tell the reader hereof that the common people, in their daily lives, do not associate the term ‘dense’ to the word ‘stupid’. It is only the complainant who is so intense to equate the term “dense” to the word “stupid”. In a democratic country, just like the Philippines, the majority shall always the winner.

Q: Before going to the other issue, do you have something to add?
A: Yes, as the Annex 6 would affirm, the website ‘http://thinkexist.com/dictionary/meaning/dense/“ cannot be located from the top three (3) pages of the Google’s search engine. This would mean that the complainant, SUPER NGUSO, consciously had chosen a website that would suit his intriguing intentions. In my mind, this is so malicious.

Q: For the term ‘dull’, how did the complainant arrive in thinking and believing that it is synonymous with the word ‘stupid’?
A: This is how SUPER NGUSO arrive at his definition for the term ‘dull’, viz;
1. First, using a computer and its internet connection, he googled it
2. Second, from the twelve million two hundred thousand (12,200,000) websites that offer numerous synonyms for the term ‘dull’, he chose ‘http://ardictionary.com/Dull/10165' (Annex 9)
3. From the said website, he picked up its synonyms, viz;
(a) slow of understanding
(b) wanting readiness of appreciation
(c) stupid
(d) doltish
(d) blockish
4. Third, from the above list of possible meanings of the term ‘dull’ he picked up what he thinks and believes would benefit him that is the term “stupid” which is in the third (3rd) place from the perceived and common meaning of the term “dull”.

Q: What can you say about that?
A: If the complainant is truly an agent of the law because he is a lawyer, he would do the best two (2) things, viz;
1. First, he would go to the Philippine Supreme Court’s website and not to any types of websites in order to search for the the term ‘dense and dull’ and not for the terms ‘dense’ and ‘dull’.
2. Lastly, he should only use one website for clarity and consistency and would not use three (3) types of websites, viz;
(a) ‘http://thinkexist.com/dictionary/meaning/dense/“
(b) ‘http://ardictionary.com/Dull/10165'
(c) ‘website of Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Synonyms’
3. Most importantly, the use of three (3) websites to locate the best-definition of the terms ‘dense’ and ‘dull’ that would suit an intriguing and personal interest is a manifestation that their meanings are not really ‘stupid’ because the perceived, standard and common meaning of a term that is usually used by Filipinos in their daily lives does not need a simple dictionary to know/apply its intended meaning.
In fact, in his Judicial Affidavit notarised in February 29, 2055, he affirmed and confirmed that he only learned its meaning from Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Synonyms.

Q: Have you tried to look for the meaning of the term ‘dull’ in the same dictionary?
A: Yes, in fact, I tried the same research techniques that he usually does (Annex 8). I got a computer in order to connect to the website of Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Synonyms. Then, I found out that the synonyms for the term ‘dull’ do not include the word ‘stupid’, viz;
(a) blunt
(b) blunted
(c) dullied
(d) obtuse

Q: How would it affect the case at bar?
A: The Annex 9 would affirm that the website ‘http://ardictionary.com/Dull/10165' cannot be located from the top three (3) pages of the Google’s search engine. This would mean that the complainant, SUPER NGUSO, consciously had chosen a website that would suit his intriguing intentions. In my mind, this is so vengeful.

Q: Do you have anything to add?
A: Yes, this Judicial Affidavit is knowingly prepared, signed and released to amend, modify, revoke and repeal all my previously released statements that directly contradict the statements hereof as well as to support and supplement other statements that may help me to bring justice in the process. To reiterate, “In Libel, it is essential that the intention of the offender in publishing the libellous matter was to discredit or dishonour the person allegedly libelled. If the matter charges as libellous is only an incident in an act which has another objective, the crime is not Libel. (page 948, Criminal Law, Book Two, 16th edition, 2006, Luis B. Reyes)”

Attached is a letter from the Office of the Ombudsman stating that it would not accept any Legal Petition Notice (LPN) from a taxpayer because the BIR Chief has already ruled that the electronic Letter of Authority (eLA) is valid and binding. However, upon careful analysis, the legal issue being presented in the latest LPN as stated in the attached letter is about the LIFTING OF WARRANT and not the eLA.

It is understandable (and we can forgive these lawyers) if the lawyers who penned the attached letter are yet to study the rules and regulations of taxation, or in other words, they have no formal education or experience to handle the BIR practices and exercises.

The purpose of sending the Office of the Ombudsman an LPN is to keep it abreast and inform of the events and irregular and corrupt practices of so many revenue officers. To close down the avenue by way of not to accept and receive any LPN from now on is to shot down the only available remedy to a taxpayer. Please be reminded that to combat the growing thirst for revenge against the miseries being experienced by many revenue officers inside their Offices and unjust interest of many revenue officers to get the cash and material things from a taxpayer, the Office of the Ombudsman plays a very vital role.

LET GET RID OFF OF INCOMPETENCE AND CORRUPTION IN THE PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT'S OFFICES

JOIN THE WAR AGAINST BIR CORRUPTION AND THE NO REPLY, WRONG REPLY ATTITUDE OF MANY GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS by sending this to others.... Do what is best for the Philippines, please.

I don't want you to commit a sin and be punished by the Almighty God by hearing and entertaining devil's messages, and spreading evil's tongue. For this purpose, I want to be HONEST TO YOU. So, if you have some moment to spare, you may click

to be able to grasp what an intelligent person would see, hear and feel. PLEASE DON'T GET ETM OR KATAX AS YOUR TAXNOCRAT WHO WOULD SAVE YOU A LOT OF MONEY FROM PAYING INCORRECT TAXES, BRIBING ERRANT REVENUE OFFICERs AND COMPENSATING FIXERS AND INFLUENCE-DEALERS, then drop him like a immaterial bomb and bad-mouthed him later on.

For a thousand, ETM Tax Agent Office will stop the hidden agenda behind these BIR letters. Don't be fooled with their friendly offers because they would bring misfortunes, mistakes and misgivings later on.

Closing of books of accounts and preparing the annual income tax return and financial statements are just around the corner. And, as all taxpayers knew, a service of an individual having a specialised intellect in accounting would be needed soon. It’s the time of the year when you have to be very careful in choosing what kind of accounting services are you going to pursue.

Hear the Japanese people pronounce the word ‘Love’ and you will understand it as ‘Rob’. It’s funny but annoying. For the past twenty (20) years, this is what running inside my head, “Is my CPA loving or robbing me?”

Two (2) parts of Emelino T Maestro have been discussing about the Robbing Relationship with a CPA for too long. Their conversations are summarised hereunder.

For the past several decades or so, my existing CPA solely handled the preparation of my books of accounts, annual income tax return and financial statements. And, for the same number of years, the BIR never missed a year to examine them. It’s examination is not cheap but financially draining and mentally anguishing.

I don’t know much about the ‘tax’ and ‘accounting’ things. For such, I engaged the services of a CPA to do them for me. I personally want to comply with the law of the Philippines because by doing so, I understand that I am pampering myself with respect and peace of mind. However, in my past and present situations, my CPA is not an ASSET anymore but more of a LIABILITY. I am becoming aware that CPAs should no longer be TRUSTED in doing what the BIR requires. I need someone who would NOT RECOMMEND to ‘bribe’ a revenue officer and can explain in a clear language the tax assessments, and rules and regulations which I can’t get or experience from the present CPAs.

It’s also frustrating and irritating to hear from my lawyers when I asked for their legal advise and assistance on the matters of taxation that it’s better to have a connection, - a brother, a friend, an associate, inside the BIR who would be the one in charge of fixing things for me which in the first place, should not be fixed if only my CPA really understands the BIR-requirements and my lawyers have the competence to protect me. Both has the responsibility to protect me but I can’t feel it from them. It’s a waste of money in paying these people.

I come now in a conclusion that my CPA is doing me no good but there is no other professional to help and assist me to get rid off of incompetency and negligence. I wish there is a School where I can learn by myself the simplicity of the complexities being implemented by the BIR.

Katax is curious what would hindrance you to attend and be a part of the growing number of taxpayers who believes that they can DO IT by themselves.

To provide a HOPE-GIVING OPPORTUNITY that would come up with LIFE-CHANGING CHANCES, FINANCIAL CONVENIENCE, and CAREER ADVANCEMENT to all NON-CPAs, NON-LAWYERS, ETM encourages them (you) to be his SCHOLARS to his Tax Accounting Literacy Program and Tax Consulting Course. Only 50 semi-scholars shall be accepted. Except for CPAs and LAWYERS, this offer is OPEN TO ALL. NO AGE LIMITATION. NO EDUCATIONAL RESTRICTION . To register, please place your name, email address and mobile number together with one “why you should be chosen’ paragraph at ‘Write a comment…’ space hereunder. Please follow instructions. CPAs and lawyers may choose to attend by paying the full cost of TALP and TCC in the amount of 150k each. VAT, EWT and other applicable taxes are for the account of the student. Call Nica or Eric at 02-9216107 or 09989793922@MaestroTaxation.org

Greetings.May the intellect and wisdom of the Almighty God be added unto the minds of all the employees and officials of the Office of the Ombudsman whenever they are reading a similar Legal Petition Notice. I pray this always.

Preamble.The Office of the Ombudsman shall investigate on its own, or on complaint by any person, any act or omission of any public official, employee, office or agency, when such act or omission appears to be illegal, unjust, improper, or inefficient.

Legal Issues to be Resolved.This Office has a legal issue to be resolved (extinguish) whether (a) a Legal Petition Notice when filed and submitted to this Office is an inadmissible form of communication or not, and (b) the acts knowingly performed by the BIR Chief although no explicit orders from the Secretary of Finance are known or have been secured are valid and enforceable against the taxpaying public.

What I understood.Last week I received two letters allegedly penned by Atty. Julita M Calderon. For this purpose, I scan-pasted them herein.

Her first letter implicitly explained that any LPN shall no longer be accepted and entertained while her second letter has acknowledged the receipt of an LPN. Although these letters hurt my feelings, they miserably failed to clearly tackle the issue of usurpation, abuse and lack of power and authority to carry out the orders of the laws of this State, specifically, Sections 6, 244 and 245, National Internal Revenue Code, as amended.

What must be done.Doubtlessly, the Ombudsman and I would agree that BIR-corruption must be stopped. And, to do it, the communication avenues between me and the Ombudsman, including you - the readers of this, must be kept open and accessible, - 24/7. A trust agreement that is spelled out in the Philippine Constitution guarantees it.

In communicating, the form and substance, through the years, have evolved dramatically and drastically. Thus, the history of the world would provide ample evidences that there is no fix and fast rules as far as the form and substance of communication are concerned. However, it can surely be agreed upon that they must also be given significance and I want to share my point of view in that view.

For the ‘form’ view, the Courts had adopted for uniformity and consistency purposes the so-called Motion, Pleading, Comment, Affidavit, etc. while for businesspeople, they prefer to call their communicating evidences as business letters. I, as a unique and distinct therefrom, design, develop and innovate my own idiosyncratic and genuine form which I called LEGAL PETITION NOTICE. Acts that are contrary to law, public order, public policy and public safety and good moral are considered illegal and irregular and must not be pursued. Applying that oldest legal doctrine, my LPN being NOT CONTRARY TO LAW, PUBLIC ORDER, PUBLIC POLICY AND PUBLIC SAFETY AND GOOD MORAL should not be banned for its appearance and format (form) or to be used as an escape route to avoid the extinguishment of a legal obligation because the default of the Philippine Constitution for it is a ‘go-signal’.

I seek and stimulate the Honourable Ombudsman to rule and issue a relevant resolution on the first issue taking into account my explanation above.

For the ‘substance’ view, I’ve been hurt a lot when I read the two letters that allegedly penned by Atty. Julita M Calderon because it just copied the BIR regulations that distorted the spirit, essence and dialect of the National Internal Revenue Code.

However, before I will go deeply into my exposure, the Ombudsman and I would agree that any communication is not confined to having a single subject matter. In the above two letters, the subject of the first one is about the Warrant of Levy and Distraint irregularly prepared and issued while the issue of the second one tackled the irregular preparation and release of an electronic Letter of Authority. It can be deduced therefrom that the resolution of the Ombudsman for two different and distinct issues are one and the same. I am so curious, ‘How does the Ombudsman come up with such likeliness?’

Of course, I would not be penalised for dealing with more than one issues or subject matters herein, am I? Just asking……

I recognised the power and authority of the BIR Chief to have a sole and an exclusive jurisdiction to interpret the NIRC. However, this power and authority is subject to certain and precedent conditions. The Secretary of Finance is mandated also by NIRC to make all the necessary rules and regulations that will implement all the provisions of the said law. And, he, the Secretary, is prohibited or not allowed to delegate the said administrative supervision and control to the BIR Chief. So all the delegation orders and instructions from the Secretary that renounce his power and authority to the BIR Chief are void ab initio. More importantly, laws must be harmonised with one another and not to be taken as an isolation from other laws.

The Ombudsman and I would agree that CORRUPTION is in the MIND. The MIND means malfeasance, incompetence, negligence, delinquency. Sadly, most of the revenue officials have MIND of their own.

In the second letter, the topic is the abuse of authority being perpetuated and emphasised (m), the implementing rules and regulations that the BIR Chief had recommended to the Secretary and later on approved by him clearly required her to prepare a PROGRAM FOR ANNUAL AUDIT SELECTION CRITERIA. Then, part of the right to due process and access to records of a taxpayer under investigation, the said AUDIT PROGRAM must be written on the face of every electronic Letter of Authority to be prepared and served to the said taxpayer who may double check if he is really covered by the said ANNUAL AUDIT PROGRAM.

Parts of me are telling me that to circumvent this simple and easy to follow order of the Secretary, the BIR Chief, although several LPNs reminding her about this have already been sent to her, knowingly ignored and skipped off the preparation and issuance of a PROGRAM FOR ANNUAL AUDIT SELECTION CRITERIA.

In that view, the Ombudsman has already acquired jurisdiction over the said case. Thus, I seek and hearten the Ombudsman to look at these cases carefully and set aside the resolutions that allegedly penned by Atty. Julita M Calderon.

For any legal advise, please coordinate with Raymond Hernandez and Ronalyn Yu

IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT FOR JANUARY 2015To provide a HOPE-GIVING OPPORTUNITY that would come up with LIFE-CHANGING CHANCES, FINANCIAL CONVENIENCE, and CAREER ADVANCEMENT to all NON-CPAs, NON-LAWYERS, ETM encourages them (you) to be his SCHOLARS to his Tax Accounting Literacy Program (TALC) and Tax Consulting Course (TCC). Only 50 shall be accepted. Except for CPAs and LAWYERS, this offer is OPEN TO ALL. NO AGE LIMITATION. NO EDUCATIONAL RESTRICTION . To register, please place your name, email address and mobile number together with one “why you should be chosen’ paragraph at ‘Write a comment…’ space hereunder. Please follow instructions. CPAs and lawyers may choose to attend by paying the full cost of TALP and TCC in the amount of 150k each. VAT, EWT and other applicable taxes are for the account of the student. Call Nica or Eric at 02-9216107 or 09989793922@MaestroTaxation.org

**Subject to change to conditions and without notice and obligation******What would other feel if they would learn this from you? You would be praised for sending this to them.. Are you prepared to be thanked...

IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT FOR JANUARY 2015To provide a HOPE-GIVING OPPORTUNITY that would come up with LIFE-CHANGING CHANCES, FINANCIAL CONVENIENCE, and CAREER ADVANCEMENT to all NON-CPAs, NON-LAWYERS, ETM encourages them (you) to be his SCHOLARS to his Tax Accounting Literacy Program (TALC) and Tax Consulting Course (TCC). Only 50 shall be accepted. Except for CPAs and LAWYERS, this offer is OPEN TO ALL. NO AGE LIMITATION. NO EDUCATIONAL RESTRICTION . To register, please place your name, email address and mobile number together with one “why you should be chosen’ paragraph at ‘Write a comment…’ space hereunder. Please follow instructions. CPAs and lawyers may choose to attend by paying the full cost of TALP and TCC in the amount of 150k each. VAT, EWT and other applicable taxes are for the account of the student. Call Nica or Eric at 02-9216107 or 09989793922@MaestroTaxation.org

**Subject to change to conditions and without notice and obligation******What would other feel if they would learn this from you? You would be praised for sending this to them.. Are you prepared to be thanked...

Attached is a Benchmarking Notice from the BIR. The first paragraph tackled what it received from a taxpayer. The second paragraph presented various statements that justified the use of benchmarking in persuading a taxpayer to pay an alleged and presumed deficiency tax assessment. The third paragraph is somewhat so intriguing and irritating.

Notwithstanding that it is misleading and misrepresenting, the third paragraph says that if a taxpayer response, then his response shall be evaluated. In the event that the evaluation is adverse thereto, he shall be receiving an electronic Letter of Authority. As a Taxnocrat for the past 30 years, this kind of statement is so malicious and full of crap. So, the possibility of receiving an electronic Letter of Authority is higher when a taxpayer responded. The best answer to the said Benchmarking Notice is either not to answer it or have a so confusing answer to it.

0922 801 0922

IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT FOR JANUARY 2015
To provide a HOPE-GIVING OPPORTUNITY that would come up with LIFE-CHANGING CHANCES, FINANCIAL CONVENIENCE, and CAREER ADVANCEMENT to all NON-CPAs, NON-LAWYERS, ETM encourages them (you) to be his SCHOLARS to his Tax Accounting Literacy Program (TALC) and Tax Consulting Course (TCC). Only 50 shall be accepted. Except for CPAs and LAWYERS, this offer is OPEN TO ALL. NO AGE LIMITATION. NO EDUCATIONAL RESTRICTION . To register, please place your name, email address and mobile number together with one “why you should be chosen’ paragraph at ‘Write a comment…’ space hereunder. Please follow instructions. CPAs and lawyers may choose to attend by paying the full cost of TALP and TCC in the amount of 150k each. VAT, EWT and other applicable taxes are for the account of the student. Call Nica or Eric at 02-9216107 or 09989793922@MaestroTaxation.org